Surgical Science, 2011, 2, 488-492
doi:10.4236/ss.2011.210107 Published Online December 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ss)
Technical Points Regarding New Enterostomy Formation
for Incarcerated Stomal Prolapse in Loop Enterostomy
Tadao Okada1, Shohei Honda1, Hisayuki Miyagi1, Akinobu Taketomi2
1Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
2Department of Gastroenterological Surgery I, Hokkaido University
Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan
Received May 11, 2011; revised July 15, 2011; accepted September 6, 2011
Abstract
Aim: Incarcerated stomal prolapse is a rare complication of enterostomy. Numerous procedures have been
described, such as additional laparotomy to fix the intraabdominal intestine in place, enterostomy revision, or
correction of the prolapse following stoma creation. The authors report successful managements by stomal
reconstruction and discuss several clinical points, including the techniques of surgical revision for incarcer-
ated stomal prolapse in loop enterostomy. Patients: Case 1) A female infant weighing 2755 g was delivered
at 34 weeks of gestation. On the first day after birth, a right supra-abdominal transverse incision of 10 cm in
diameter was used for transverse loop colostomy in a cloacal malformation. Two centimeters of the stomal
loop was approximated with sutures to prevent evisceration of the small intestine between the 2 limbs of the
loop. Interrupted sutures of 5-0 absorbable monofilament secured the seromuscle of the colon to the perito-
neum and fascia, and also to the skin. The distal limb of the colostomy prolapsed 11 months after birth. The
physical findings revealed that 10 cm of the distal limb was intussuscepted. Case 2) A female infant weigh-
ing 2550 g was delivered at 39 weeks of gestation. A radiological examination by contrast enema showed no
spastic rectum and colon, as in Hirschsprung’s disease. Under the laparotomy of a right supra-abdominal
transverse incision of 5 cm in diameter, loop ileostomy was performed at 30cm on the proximal side of the
cecum such as Case 1. Subsequently, the proximal limb of the ileostomy prolapsed 2 days after operation.
The physical findings revealed that 10 cm of the proximal limb was intussuscepted. New enterostomy for-
mation: Divided enterostomy was performed with 3-cm stitching of each limb. The stomal site was moved
to the inside from the previous stomal site to oversew and fix by the rectal fascia. The children have been
well without trouble since undergoing the new eneterostomy formation. Conclusions: Operation to repair the
prolapse of a stoma is advised if it causes problems. We found that simple mobilization of the bowel and ex-
cision of the redundant bowel provided a satisfactory result in the present cases.
Keywords: Incarcerated Stomal Prolapse, Stomal Reconstruction, Loop Enterostomy, Divided Enterostomy
1. Introduction
Intestinal stomal formation in infants and children is a
common procedure undertaken as part of the surgical
management of congenital malformations and acquired
conditions of the gastrointestinal tract [1]. Complications
of stoma have been decreasing recently due to improve-
ments in both surgical techniques and the stoma care
system. However, we sometimes still encounter patients
who have stoma problems. The placement of a stoma for
the diversion of intestinal flow in children, particularly in
neonates, may present problems because a very dilated
bowel must be brought through a thin abdominal wall [2].
Stomal prolapse occurs rather frequently with loop
stomas, but incarceration is rare [2,3]. Both proximal and
distal parts of the limbs of the stoma can prolapse, which
can lead to ischemia of the stoma or of the extruded
bowel [4]. Numerous procedures have been described,
such as additional laparotomy to fix the intraabdominal
colon in place [2,5], enterostomy revision, or correction
of the prolapse following stoma creation [4]. Golladay,
et al. [2] reported that creation of an end loop stoma by

T. OKADA ET AL.489
the purse string technique prevented prolapse and could
be accomplished expeditiously. However, occasionally,
the stoma must be revised [6]. Management strategies we
have employed include operating on one patient with
incarcerated stomal prolapse.
We describe herein 2 infants: first, an infant with a
cloacal anomaly who underwent reconstruction for incar-
cerated stomal prolapse in a loop colostomy; second, an
infant with Hirschsprung’s disease who underwent re-
construction for incarcerated stomal prolapse in a loop
ileostomy. After reviewing other cases, we discuss seve-
ral special operative techniques regarding new stomal
formation for incarcerated stomal prolapse in loop colo-
stomy and ileostomy, especially with regard to the sus-
pected causes of stomal prolapse.
2. Case Report
2.1. Case 1
A female infant weighing 2755 g was delivered by nor-
mal vaginal delivery at 34 weeks of gestation. Prenatal
ultrasonography (US) had not disclosed any abnormal
findings. Immediately after birth, severe abdominal dis-
tention became evident. On physical examination, a sin-
gle perineal opening implied the presence of a cloacal
malformation. Laboratory examinations revealed neither
anemia nor signs of inflammation. A plain radiograph
disclosed multiple bubbles in the intestine. Abdominal
US disclosed right hydrosalpinx. On the first day after
birth, a right supra-abdominal transverse incision of 10
cm in diameter was used for the drainage of the right
fallopian tube and transverse loop colostomy. Two cen-
timeters of the stomal loop was approximated with su-
tures to prevent evisceration of the small intestine be-
tween the 2 limbs of the loop. Triangular stitches were
made to the rectal fascia and peritoneum, and to each
limb of the colonic loop at the point where the 2 limbs of
the loop were in contact with one another. Interrupted
sutures of 5-0 absorbable monofilament secured the se-
romuscle of the colon to the peritoneum and fascia, and
also to the skin. To avoid tension on the underlying su-
ture line, a small rubber tube was placed under the loop
for 5 days.
A cystocutaneostomy was performed 2 months after
birth because of right vescicoureteral reflux with relaps-
ing urinary tract infections. Thereafter, right ureterocu-
taneostomy was performed 8 months after birth. She had
neither sacral neural anomalies nor disturbances which
affected abdominal muscle tone.
The distal limb of the colostomy prolapsed 11 months
after birth. The physical findings revealed that 10 cm of
the distal limb was intussuscepted, and the color of the
intussuscepted colon was dark-brown (Figure 1). The
patient could not undergo early colostomy closure be-
cause her body size was too small for a radical operation
to repair the cloacal anomaly. Manual, gentle reduction
of the intussuscepted colon was successful, and the pa-
tient was prepared for reconstruction of the stoma by the
administration of oral antibiotics and fasting for 24 hr
before the surgery. The stomal opening was two-fingers
wide.
For reconstruction of the stoma, a transverse abdomi-
nal incision near the medial angle of the stoma was placed
in the previous wound 7 days after the manual reduction.
There was little abdominal ascites and the suture fixation
to each limb of the colonic loop was loose (Figure 2).
Ileocecal resection was required for stoma-revision of the
divided colostomy because the colostomy had been placed
in the 4-cm oral portion of the ascending colon from the
appendix on the basis of operative findings. Divided co-
lostomy was performed with 3-cm stitching of each limb
(Figure 2). The stomal site was moved to the inside from
the previous stomal site to oversew and fix by the rectal
fascia (Figure 2). Fluids were administered by mouth for
48 hr, and thereafter, milk feedings were resumed. The
child has been well without trouble for 3 years from
stomal reconstruction.
2.2. Case 2
A female infant weighing 2550 g was delivered by nor-
mal vaginal delivery at 39 weeks of gestation. She eva-
cuated once a week at 6 months after birth, and vomiting
appeared at 11 months old. She was referred to our insti-
tute for further evaluation of constipation and vomiting
at 1 year old. Neither sacral neural anomalies nor distur-
bances which affected abdominal muscle tone were noted.
Figure 1. Appearance of incarcerated stomal prolapse in
Case 1.

T. OKADA ET AL. 490
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 2. Operative findings at stomal reconstruction in
Case 1. (a) The suture fixation to each limb of the colonic
loop was loose; (b) Divided colostomy was performed with
3-cm stitching of each limb; (c) The stomal site was moved
toward the middle of the body relative to the previous sto-
mal site, with oversewing and fixation by the rectal fascia.
A radiological examination by contrast enema showed
no spastic rectum and colon, as in Hirschsprung’s disease.
However, Hirschsprung’s disease was diagnosed by an
enzyme-histochemical acetylcholinesterase reaction in
native mucosal biopsies of the distal rectum and the ab-
sence of a relaxation reflux by anorectal manometry. She
suffered from enterocolitis 3 times since the diagnosis of
Hirschsprung’s disease.
Under the laparotomy of a right supra-abdominal trans-
verse incision of 5 cm in diameter, loop ileostomy was
performed at 30 cm on the proximal side of the cecum
because of the presence of bowel caliber change at 10 cm
on the proximal side of the cecum. Two centimeters of
the stomal loop was approximated with sutures to pre-
vent evisceration of the small intestine between the 2
limbs of the loop. Triangular stitches were made to the
rectal fascia and peritoneum, and to each limb of the il-
eum loop at the point where the 2 limbs of the loop were
in contact with one another. Interrupted sutures of 5-0
absorbable monofilament secured the seromuscle of the
colon to the peritoneum and fascia, and also to the skin.
Subsequently, the proximal limb of the ileostomy pro-
lapsed 2 days after operation. The physical findings re-
vealed that 10 cm of the proximal limb was intussus-
cepted, and the intussuscepted ileum was not discolored.
The stomal opening was two-fingers wide. Manual, gen-
tle reduction of the intussuscepted ileum was successful;
however, the stoma prolapsed from one to two times per
day and gradually discolored (Figure 3). We performed
the reconstruction of the stoma at 14 days after the ope-
ration.
For reconstruction of the stoma, a transverse abdomi-
nal incision near the medial angle of the stoma was pla-
ced in the previous wound. There was little abdominal
ascites, and the suture fixation to each limb of the ileum
loop was loose. Ileal resection of 40 cm was required for
stoma-revision of the divided ileostomy because the pro-
lapsed proximal ileum was edematous and erythematous.
Divided ileostomy was performed with 3-cm stitching of
each limb (Figure 2). The stomal site was moved to the
inside from the previous stomal site to oversew and fix
by the rectal fascia (Figure 2). Fluids were administered
Figure 3. Appearance of incarcerated stomal prolapse in
Case 2.

T. OKADA ET AL.491
by mouth for 48 hr, and thereafter, milk feedings were
resumed. The child has been well without trouble since
undergoing the modified Duhamel pull-through tech-
nique (Martin) at 2 years old.
3. Discussion
Loop colostomy is constructed mainly as a temporary
diversion for stools in patients with high or intermediate
anorectal malformation or Hirschsprung’s disease [7,8].
Sigmoid loop colostomy has been shown to be associated
with fewer complications compared to transverse loop
colostomy [7]. It is therefore advisable to construct a
sigmoid loop colostomy whenever possible. However,
transverse colostomy is constructed in patients with clo-
acal anomalies, such as our Case 1, based on the conside-
ration that there is insufficient distal colon for a pull-
through operation. Ileostomy is performed in patients
with total colonic or extensive Hirschsprung’s disease in
order to facilitate bodyweight gain and prevent enteroco-
litis.
Stomal prolapse is defined as protrusion of at least one
limb of the enterostomy for more than 6 cm beyond the
skin surface [3]. Prolapse has more in common with in-
testinal intussusception than it does with hernia, and, as a
corollary, is more related to point fixation and intestinal
motility than to increased intra-abdominal pressure and
abdominal wall laxity [3]. It was suspected that distal
bowel obstruction at the time of enterostomy and loose
fixation of each limb of the enteric loop were reasons for
stomal prolapse through our case experience.
Stomal prolapse is the most frequently noted compli-
cation of colostomy, occurring in 3 to 8% of all colos-
tomies, and stomas in children are more likely to pro-
lapse than those in adults [3]. Obstruction at the time of
colostomy, such as in our case of cloacal anomaly, is the
all-encompassing predisposing factor of stomal prolapse.
Chandler, et al. [3] reported that all but one of 11 pro-
lapsing colostomies in children had been done to relieve
distal obstruction. The mechanism appeared to be a dis-
proportion between the size of the fascia defect and the
smaller diameter of the bowel after decompression. Oth-
ers have put similar stress on the size of the fascial aper-
ture, and there is a continuing interest in techniques to
make the fascia fit the bowel as snugly as possible [3].
The distal limb of any colostomy or ileostomy is destined
to shrink from disuse, and therefore, is always more
likely to be a loose fit in the fascia which is, why the dis-
tal unused stoma prolapses. Many authors have stressed
suture fixation of the bowel at the fascial level to prevent
prolapse. There is a suggestion that taking the time to fix
the bowel at the fascia level may be of benefit. The loops
prolapsed 10 times more frequently, 26% vs. 2.4%, indi-
cating a very significant difference in vulnerability to
prolapse for the loop and divided types of colostomies in
adults [3]. Chandler, et al. [3] reported that 6 additional
operative procedures were performed in 4 of 69 patients
(6.0%) with stomal prolapse, and hastened colostomy
closure occurred in 14 of 69 patients (20.3%).
Patients are also sometimes very frustrated and de-
pressed because of the redundant bowel and may need
frequent hospital admission. Stomas in children beyond
12 months of age were particularly likely to prolapse [3].
Chandler, et al. [3] reported that the loops demonstrated
a greater propensity to prolapse the more proximally they
were located. However, another report found no signifi-
cant difference regarding the location of the loops, whe-
reas the prolapse rate was greater for loop than for di-
vided colostomies [8]. According to the stomal site, the
tendency for transverse colostomy to prolapse was repor-
ted previously to be 3 in 7 patients with transverse colo-
stomy, and prolapse may have been caused by the fact
that the transverse colon is relatively mobile [8]. It was
more frequent in emergency stomas created for obstruc-
tion or stoma brought through the main operative inci-
sion [6].
Several special operative techniques have been de-
scribed to decrease the risk of prolapse, such as skin bri-
dge, subcutaneous tunnel for bowel exit, purse-string su-
tures at the fascial level, and an anchoring U stitch [6].
Kransa [4] described the simple purse-string technique
for treating prolapse and intussusception of colostomy,
and the results have been excellent.
Chandramouli, et al. [1] reported that revision was
needed in 2 of 30 children (6.7%) with external intestinal
prolapse for significant obstructive stomal prolapse [3].
Four patients (6% of the prolapse group) were subjected
to an extra operative procedure because of prolapse.
Twice in one child and once in an adult, an attempt was
made to fix the prolapse in a reduced position by button
colopexy. This “spot welding” technique was unsuc-
cessful both times in the child but held the adult’s colon
in place until an appropriate time for colostomy closure
[3]. One attempt was made to fix the prolapsing bowel to
the parietal peritoneum, using open laparotomy and mul-
tiple suture points of fixation, but this prolapse recurred.
Chandramouli, et al. [1] reported that 2 prolapses were
treated by advancement and amputation of the prolapsing
segments, with reconstruction of the colostomy in the
same location but separating the 2 limbs by a fascial
bridge [3]. Al-Salem, et al. [7] reported that stomal revi-
sion was required because of frequent prolapse in 2 of 14
children who suffered prolapse. The revision rate for
colostomy prolapse is lower, but when required, usually
in a loop enterostomy such as in our cases, the loop is cut
and converted to a divided type [1]. The stoma should

T. OKADA ET AL. 492
preferably be directed through the strong muscle layer of
the rectus muscle and provided with sufficient stomal
limbs [6].
4. Conclusions
In conclusion, the creation of an abdominal stoma should
not be regarded as a minor surgical procedure. Operation
to repair the prolapse of a stoma is advised if it causes
problems. We found that simple mobilization of the
bowel and excision of the redundant bowel provided a
satisfactory result in the present cases.
5. References
[1] B Chandramouli, K Srinivasan and N Ananthakrishnan,
“Morbidity and Mortality of Colostomy and Its Closure
in Children,” Journal of Pediatric Surgery, Vol. 39, No. 4,
2004, pp. 596-599. doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2003.12.016
[2] E. S. Golladay, F. Bernay and C. W. Wagner, “Preven-
tion of Prolapse in Pediatric Enterostomas with Purse
String Technique,” Journal of Pediatric Surgery, Vol. 25,
No. 9, 1990, pp. 990-991.
doi:10.1016/0022-3468(90)90244-4
[3] J. G. Chandler and B. P. Evans, “Colostomy Prolapse,”
Surgery, Vol. 84, No. 5, 1978, pp. 577-582.
[4] I. H. Krasna, “A Simple Purse String Suture Technique
for Treatment of Colostomy Prolapse and Intussuscep-
tion,” Journal of Pediatric Surgery, Vol. 14, No. 6, 1979,
pp. 801-802. doi:10.1016/S0022-3468(79)80269-9
[5] M. Gauderer and R. Izant, “A Technique for Temporary
Control of Colostomy Prolapse in Children,” Journal of
Pediatric Surgery, Vol. 20, No. 6, 1985, pp. 653-655.
doi:10.1016/S0022-3468(85)80017-8
[6] M. T. Cheung, “Complication of an Abdominal Stoma:
An Analysis of 322 Stomas,” Australian and New Zea-
land Journal of Surgery, Vol. 65, No. 11, 1995, pp. 808-
811. doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.1995.tb00566.x
[7] A. H. Al-Salem, C. Grant and S. Khawaja, “Colostomy
Complications in Infants and Children,” International
Surgery, Vol. 77, No. 3, 1992, pp. 164-166.
[8] N. Patwardhan, E. M. Kiely, D. P. Drake, et al., “Colos-
tomy for Anorectal Anomalies: High Incidence of Com-
plications,” Journal of Pediatric Surgery, Vol. 36, No. 5,
2001, pp. 795-798. doi:10.1053/jpsu.2001.22963